Movie Responses

R!P REMIX A MANIFESTO

The second act: the past always tries to control the future and act three: our future is becoming less free contradict themselves in this time period.

Today’s generations are trying to break from the old traditional thoughts by rebellious protests and social media expressions. There is now freedom to criticize whatever, but this in turns forces people to tiptoe around certain subjects and phrases. This indirectly takes us back to a time of sheltering kids from controversial topics such as sexuality and racism. We are taken back to a time were the past, or the older generations, manipulate the new era. But rather, this time, the new era is not letting the older generation dictate what is to go or stay, but are rather blending and repeating the past’s ideal society rules/morals. We are essentially doing a similar technique of what Walt Disney did: taking the old ideals and update them relevant to this age.

On the topic of copyright, there isn’t too much controversy today on copy righting movies as opposed to music. There are many musicians who are paying close attention to their note compositions and lyrics used in other songs. However, many of these cord combinations have already been done before as noted in the RIP Remix a Manifesto. So the question is, who is to have rights on artist work?

Ideas are recycled by what we study and read. There can only be a handful of new ideas that come about every few years then. The lead, topics, and morals all have made history in a number of mix combinations like music. Therefore, the copyright years only protect the previous artist who legally put their name on it. This is where we will succumb to the pressures of locking down every possible right. The basic right to freedom of speech is becoming restricted because of this. What will we be able to claim within the years to come with the government regulations as they are the parents overseeing their children.

Delusions in Modern Primitivism

This movie is really controversial from the subject to production.

Watching this film, there are aspects that make me wonder if the film is real. With the ambulance being stationed outside after the shot, I can see this happening. There have been bad cops throughout the years, so why not paramedics. The two, cops and paramedics, go hand in hand with sticky and dangerous situations.  However, there are two major points that are questionable: the car interview and the actual shot into the shoulder.

 The car interview is shot so it seems very documentary like than cinematic film. There is a quality of hand shakiness, the evening lighting, and the car actually moving rather than pretending it is going somewhere. This gives a more one on one personal interview for a newbie like documentary director.

The shot is recorded at an angle that you cannot see the bullet go through, the backside of the shoulder, or the bullet coming out of the gun itself. Immediately once the guy is shot, he is holding his shoulder which does not allow for us to decide if the shot really happened. This is the moment that really decides if this is documentary or mockumentary.